MASTER PLAN REEXAMINATION REPORT
City of Summit
Union County, New Jersey
November 2006
MASTER PLAN REEXAMINATION REPORT
City of Summit
Union County, New Jersey
Adopted by the Planning Board
November 2006
Prepared by
Heyer, Gruel & Associates
In cooperation with the Master Plan Subcommittee
and Planning Board
The original of this report was signed and
sealed in accordance with N.J.S.A. 45:14A-12.
__________________________________
Susan S. Gruel, P.P. #1955
_________________________________
Kyra Quinn, Associate Planner
MASTER PLAN REEXAMINATION REPORT
Credits
PLANNING BOARD
William Dangler, Chair
Jeffrey Wagenbach, Vice Chair
Peter Daley
Paul Deehan
Christopher Humphrey
Diane Klaif
Gary Lewis
George Lucaci
Susan McDonough
Sheila Pelzer
Vicki Weber
Pamela Langell, Secretary
Clifford Gibbons, Counsel
MASTER PLAN REEXAMINATION COMMITTEE
Mayor Jordan Glatt
Cynthia Martin, Co-Chair
Susan McDonough, Co-Chair
William Anderson
Sandra Bloom
Sharon Clark
William Dangler
Paul Deehan
Marco DiMayorca
Kathleen Feeney
Lisa Grattan
Milton Irvin
Virginia Jordan
Mike Kitsos
Frank Macioce
Phyllis Sank
Roger Smith
Jeffrey Wagenbach
Maria Zazzera
Heyer, Gruel & Associates, Planning Consultant
Christopher Cotter, City Administrator
Beth Kinney, Director of Community Services
Marion Sexton, Executive Assistant
INTRODUCTION
This Report constitutes the Master Plan Reexamination Report for the City of Summit, as defined by the New
Jersey Municipal Land Use Law (N.J.S.A. 40:55D-89). The purpose of the Reexamination Report is to
review and evaluate the local master plan and development regulations on a periodic basis in order to
determine the need for updates and revisions. The City of Summit adopted its last comprehensive Master
Plan in 2000 and its last Reexamination Report in October of 2003.
The Municipal Land Use Law (Chapter 291, Laws of New Jersey, 1975, as amended, known as the
MLUL) establishes the legal framework for municipal planning and requires that municipalities conduct a
general reexamination of their master plans at least every six years and that this review be conducted by
the Planning Board. This reexamination is required to maintain the presumption of validity for municipal
land use policies and ordinances. The re-examination also recognizes municipal planning as an ongoing
and participatory function of local governing. The MLUL (N.J.S.A. 40:55D-89) states the following:
Periodic Reexamination: The governing body shall, at least every six years, provide for a general
reexamination of its master plan and development regulations by the Planning Board which shall
prepare and adopt by resolution a report on the findings of such reexamination, a copy of which
report and resolution shall be sent to the County Planning Board and the municipal clerk of each
adjoining municipality. The first such reexamination shall have been completed by August 1, 1982.
The next reexamination shall be completed by August 1, 1988. Thereafter, a reexamination shall be
completed at least once every six years from the previous reexamination."
"The reexamination report shall state:
a. The major problems and objectives relating to land development in the municipality at the time of
the adoption of the last reexamination report.
b. The extent to which such problems and objectives have been reduced or have increased
subsequent to such date.
c. The extent to which there have been significant changes in the assumptions, policies and objectives
forming the basis for the master plan or development regulations as last revised, with particular regard
to the density and distribution of population and land uses, housing conditions, circulation,
conservation of natural resources, energy conservation, collection, disposition, and recycling of
designated recyclable materials, and changes in State, county and municipal policies and objectives.
d. The specific changes recommended for the master plan or development regulations, if any,
including underlying objectives, policies and standards, or whether a new plan or regulations should
be prepared.
e. The recommendations of the planning board concerning the incorporation of redevelopment plans
adopted pursuant to the "Local Redevelopment and Housing Law," P.L.1992, c. 79 (C.40A:12A-1 et
1
November 2006
al.) into the land use plan element of the municipal master plan, and recommended changes, if any, in
the local development regulations necessary to effectuate the redevelopment plans of the municipality."
This Reexamination Report addresses the above noted minimal statuary criteria by addressing the land
development problems and objectives addressed in the last re-examination report of October 2003. It also
contains material which updates and reevaluates planning information contained in the last comprehensive
master plan which was adopted in 2000.
In order to thoroughly examine the required criteria (a. through d.) for each Element of the Master Plan, this
Report treats each Element (e.g., Land Use and Zoning, Open Space and Recreation, Circulation, etc.) as
a separate section, once the overall issues of Goals and Objectives have been examined and updated.
Insofar as criteria e., regarding the incorporation of redevelopment plans, is concerned, the City does not
contemplate formal redevelopment activities at the time of this Reexamination Report.
The Master Plan Reexamination Committee has made a concerted effort to address fully the planning,
zoning and land development issues within the City. This process has included much study and work by
the Reexamination Committee, interaction with various municipal departments and organizations, and
considered input from the public, solicited in both formal and informal settings.
2
November 2006
I.
REEXAMINATION OF OVERALL MASTER PLAN VISION, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
VISION, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE CITY
Summit is a small residential City that seeks to: maintain a high quality of life for all of its residents; manage
an appropriate balance between and among residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, recreational
uses and public open space; and provide carefully articulated land use regulations for the development
and redevelopment of all of these vital community components.
•
Preserve existing residential neighborhoods and offer a diversity of housing types.
•
Maintain and upgrade the availability of community resources for residents through modern, efficient
and strategically located facilities.
•
Strengthen connections within the City between and among residential neighborhoods, community
resources, the Business Districts, and the region, through the use of public transit, sidewalk networks,
and bike routes.
•
Recognize and manage the City’s position as a regional center – as a transportation, employment,
shopping and entertainment destination.
•
Balance growth and development opportunities with the established pattern of development and
existing infrastructure.
•
Reinforce the Central Business District and adjacent Business zones as a mixed-use core that is
pedestrian oriented with a concentration of commercial, civic and institutional uses in close proximity
to housing and mass transit.
•
Recognize the importance of cultural arts as a contributing element to the City.
•
Encourage a balanced development pattern, which will protect and enhance long term economic and
social interests of present and future residents in order to maintain and improve the City’s overall
quality of life.
3
November 2006
MASTER PLAN OBJECTIVES
Land Use
•
To support the upgrading of substandard properties in the City through code enforcement efforts,
education, ordinance amendments and other initiatives.
•
To promote a desirable visual environment through creative and flexible development techniques with
respect to environmental assets and constraints of the City.
•
To encourage residential development in locations and at densities which are compatible with existing
development patterns and which public roadways and utilities can service.
•
To recognize the changing needs of Overlook Hospital.
•
To improve the quality of neighborhood business areas.
•
To clearly define commercial and industrial areas with natural boundaries and effective buffers.
•
To recognize the City’s role as a regional center without negatively impacting quality of life of its
residents.
•
To raise awareness of and encourage the use of “green” building practices.
Housing
•
To continue Summit’s tradition of providing for a variety of housing types designed to support and
address the housing needs of a diverse population representing a variety of income groups.
•
To particularly focus on identifying and realizing opportunities to provide affordable housing for low
income households and housing options for senior citizens.
4
November 2006
Economic Development
•
To encourage and promote economic development and revitalization through new investment,
maintenance and reinvestment in existing commercial and industrial activities within the City in areas
suitable for such development.
•
To maintain the City’s employment base.
•
To plan for continued economic viability by strengthening the tax base through the encouragement of
continued private investment and tax-producing uses which are consistent with community needs,
desires, existing development and environmental concerns.
Community Facilities
•
To provide community services which address the changing demographic characteristics of the
population.
•
To provide and encourage an effective array of recreational and cultural programs and opportunities
for all segments of the community.
•
To coordinate the construction of improvements with the City’s Capital Improvement Program so that
community facilities are available when needed.
•
To encourage the placement of public art in strategic locations throughout the City.
•
To efficiently balance the use of school facilities both as schools and community resources.
•
To inventory the cultural resources of the City.
•
To evaluate compliance with ADA standards so that improvements are not only ADA compliant but
also as “user friendly” as possible.
5
November 2006
Circulation
•
To encourage the location and design of transportation and circulation routes which will promote the
free flow of traffic in appropriate locations while seeking ways to address congestion and unsafe
roadway conditions.
•
To channel through-traffic to major streets and discourage it in residential neighborhoods.
•
To improve pedestrian safety.
•
To provide for adequate and safe parking and loading/unloading facilities especially in business
districts and at school sites.
•
To improve and expand sidewalks and bike routes, where feasible.
•
To relieve traffic congestion in the CRBD.
•
To encourage the use of mass transit.
Conservation
•
To protect natural and environmental resources including floodplains, wetlands, steep slopes, and
aquifer recharge areas and areas suitable for public and quasi-public recreational activities.
•
To identify and preserve environmentally sensitive areas in the City.
•
To develop a “Green” Master Plan for the City that encourages sustainable building practices, energy
conservation, recycling and educational outreach on relevant topics.
•
To encourage the use of conservation easements on environmentally sensitive lands in private
ownership to protect future disturbance.
•
To conserve treed rights-of-way, continue a tree planting program and encourage protection and
replacement of landmark trees.
6
November 2006
•
To reclaim brownfields.
Parks and Open Space
•
To identify as open space/recreation certain public and private lands that serve as open space,
buffers, streetscape or vistas; and/or are in a strategic location as it relates to existing parks and
recreation.
•
To encourage public /private partnerships and continue to explore creative funding opportunities.
•
To preserve and enhance park and recreation facilities, where appropriate, within the City to meet the
needs and demands of present and future residents.
•
To explore the creation of a linear park along the Passaic River.
•
To create physical links, where feasible, between City parks and the County park system.
Utilities
•
To encourage the efficient management and regulation of storm water through the implementation of
appropriate guidelines which will prevent future drainage problems and provide for environmentally
sound land use planning.
•
To continue to rehabilitate and upgrade the City’s sewer system.
Historic
•
To recognize and preserve the historic character of the City.
•
To explore incentives to encourage the maintenance and facade restoration of historically notable
buildings.
•
To encourage the preservation of historic buildings and landmarks that are significant to Summit’s past.
CRBD
•
To preserve and enhance the existing character and scale of downtown.
7
November 2006
•
To ensure that the City’s future regulations continue to contribute to the economic viability of the
downtown.
•
To maintain and encourage mixed use buildings that contain street level retail and office and/or
residential on upper floors.
•
To encourage the creation of more residential units on upper floors of buildings in the downtown.
•
To recognize the significance of the existing historic landmark buildings in downtown.
•
To upgrade older buildings to capitalize on their architecturally significant character.
•
To add design standards to the City’s Development Regulations Ordinance (DRO) that encourage
physical improvements.
•
To create stronger pedestrian connections to community facilities/civic buildings and adjacent
residential neighborhoods.
•
To continue to improve the pedestrian friendly atmosphere in the downtown.
•
To maintain attractive gateways into downtown through use of landscaping, signage, traffic calming
techniques, and public art.
•
To maintain a comprehensive municipal signage program.
•
To encourage retailers to stay open later in the evening in order to increase street activity.
•
To encourage more special events in the downtown.
•
To explore additional convenient parking alternatives for employees, customers, commuters and
residents that complement the existing streetscape.
8
November 2006
•
To implement a retail enhancement plan and encourage locally owned retail stores rather than large
national retailers.
•
To promote mass transit.
•
To encourage bicycling.
•
To encourage art in public places.
•
To maximize leveraging of public and private funds in pursuit of the goals expressed herein.
Assumptions
1. To enhance the safety and well-being of the community through comprehensive, timely, effective and
just programs that address significant needs and problems.
2. The City of Summit will be able to guide its growth in accordance with the Municipal Land Use Law
and will have meaningful input into any proposed County, regional, State and/or Federal
development plans, which affect the City or its immediate environs.
3. The future growth during the next ten (10) year period will not exceed the capacity of the City to
provide essential community facilities, utilities and/or services.
4. The City will continue to function as a regional center.
9
November 2006
POLICIES
The City of Summit Master Plan is based upon policies that have been developed by the Common
Council, Planning Board and other land development review agencies.
1. The Master Plan and the City’s overall planning policies will provide for a variety of residential and
non-residential uses which will encourage continuation and enhancement of Summit as a quality small
residential city.
2. Land developments should be designed to protect and enhance the quality and diversity of the City
and to protect neighborhoods from the intrusion of inappropriate or incompatible uses.
3. The City will consider and evaluate innovative development and zoning proposals which would
enhance and protect the City’s diverse character, economic vitality and overall high quality of life.
4. The City will emphasize a balancing of concerns in establishing land use and zoning policies
throughout Summit seeking to provide economic stability, public safety, retention of employment
opportunities and neighborhood preservation.
5. The City will encourage and provide for review of development proposals of uses which promote
social, welfare, cultural, recreational, service and religious activities within Summit to serve present and
future residents of the Summit area.
6. The City will update and implement the technology plan to provide for enduring institutional memory
essential for enhanced code enforcement and precedents for future land use decisions.
The
technology plan should take into account the City’s newly installed Geographic Information System
(GIS) and reflect the status of the City’s attempts to install a city-wide wireless internet network.
STANDARDS
The Master Plan provides standards for development, including type, density and location of development
and delineation of areas which are generally not developable. The Master Plan also provides
recommended standards for roadways and other facilities. The City Development Regulations Ordinance,
10
November 2006
including zoning, site plan, and land subdivision and design regulations provides specific standards for the
design, construction and development of individual land uses and development sites within the City. In
addition, City regulations pertaining to utilities, fire prevention, flood plains, wetlands, soil erosion, street
trees and other development factors have been adopted and are applied by the Planning Board, Zoning
Board of Adjustment, as well as various municipal agencies and commissions, Union County, the State of
New Jersey and various federal as well as regional agencies.
11
November 2006
II.
REEXAMINATION OF LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT
A. THE MAJOR PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES RELATED TO LAND USE IN SUMMIT AT THE TIME
OF THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003 REEXAMINATION REPORT.
Land Use Objectives:
•
To support the upgrading of substandard properties in the City through code enforcement
efforts, education, ordinance amendments and other initiatives.
•
To promote a desirable visual environment through creative and flexible development
techniques with respect to environmental assets and constraints of the City.
•
To continue Summit’s tradition of providing for a variety of housing types designed to support
and address the housing needs of a diverse population representing a variety of income
groups.
•
To encourage residential development in locations and at densities that are comparable with
existing development patterns and that public roadways and utilities can service.
•
To recognize the changing needs of Overlook Hospital and provide for the redevelopment of
the Overlook neighborhood through collaboration with Atlantic Health System.
•
To increase housing opportunities for senior citizens.
•
To improve the quality of neighborhood business areas.
•
To clearly define commercial and industrial areas with natural boundaries and effective
buffers.
•
To recognize the City’s role as a regional center without impacting quality of life of its
residents.
•
To fully utilize the upper floor spaces in the CRBD, encouraging residential use where
appropriate, to provide for much needed housing and to prevent building deterioration while
protecting retail trade.
•
To recognize private recreation, e.g. the Canoe Brook golf course, as a separate use district.
12
November 2006
B.
THE EXTENT TO WHICH SUCH PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES HAVE BEEN REDUCED OR
HAVE INCREASED SINCE THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003
REEXAMINATION REPORT.
The following changes have occurred consistent with the recommendations of Master Plan 2000.
Residential Zones
•
The R-43 district was expanded to include lots along Hobart Avenue to Whittredge Road and
along Ridge Road between Hobart Avenue and Fernwood Road.
•
The lot at the corner of Dogwood and Hobart Road, as well as the lots at the corner of
Bellevue Avenue and Summit Avenue, were rezoned from R-43 to R-25.
•
The area along Pine Grove Avenue and Ashland Road towards Garden Road was rezoned
from R-15 to R-6.
•
Blackburn Place between Blackburn Road and Pine Grove Avenue and the adjacent block to
the west of Pine Grove Avenue between Blackburn Road and Blackburn Place, including four
lots to the west of Blackburn Place, were rezoned from R-15 to R-10.
•
The three lots east of the church on Glenside Avenue were rezoned from R-43 to R-10.
•
Hillside Avenue was rezoned from MFT to R-10.
•
Four properties on the east side of Woodland Avenue, north of the newly designated ORC
zone, were rezoned from R-6 to R-10.
•
The area along Mountain Avenue between Elm Street and William Street was rezoned from
R-6 to R-5.
•
Five properties at the end of Orchard Street were rezoned from R-5 to R-6.
•
The southwest corner of Irving Place and Springfield Avenue and the southwest corner of
Morris Avenue and Ashwood Avenue were rezoned from B to R-5.
•
An area south of Russell Place was rezoned from RAH-16 to the new TH-1 Townhouse-1
zone.
•
An area between Springfield Avenue and Middle Avenue was rezoned to MFT.
•
An area between DeForest Avenue, Summit Avenue, and Beechwood Road (containing the
Summit Medical Group site) was placed in the new MFT-1 Multi-Family Tower Residential-1
zone.
13
November 2006
•
The RAH-6, RAH-8, and RAH-16 affordable housing zones were eliminated. New
mechanisms for addressing the City’s affordable housing obligation are addressed in the
City’s Housing Element and Fair Share Plan.
•
Several areas adjacent to the B zone along DeForest Avenue and on the easterly side of
Summit Avenue were rezoned from MFT to MF.
Non-Residential Zones
•
The Canoe Brook Golf Course was removed from the R-43 zone and placed in a new G golf
land use designation.
•
An area along DeForest and Woodland Avenue, and a small area on the north side of
Hawthorne Place, were placed in a new zone, ORC Office Residential Character.
•
Seven lots on the north side of Springfield Avenue between High Street and New England
Road were placed into the new ORC-1 Office Residential Character -1 zone.
•
Five areas were placed within a new zone, the NB Neighborhood Business zone district.
The NB-zoned areas are located in the vicinity of Old Springfield Avenue and Passaic
Avenue; Morris Avenue and Aubrey Street; Broad Street and Ashwood Avenue; Park Avenue
and Orchard Street; and Morris Avenue and Springfield Avenue.
•
The recommendation of Master Plan 2000 to create a new H Hotel zone for the Grand
Summit Hotel has not been implemented but remains valid.
CRBD
A CRBD Master Plan was adopted by the Planning Board as an amendment to the Master Plan in
November 2005. The stated purpose of the Plan is to “recommend action strategies that will promote
private reinvestment in the CRBD and allow market forces to capitalize on its assets while preserving
and enhancing the best aspects of its current character.” The Plan contains a variety of
recommendations designed to enhance the CRBD. Key recommendations are as follows:
•
Increase the FAR standard to 300% in order to encourage reinvestment in the downtown.
•
Respond to present and future parking demand with a parking plan and implementation
policy. This should occur in conjunction with the increase of the FAR.
•
Based on a projected build-out, explore a parking trust fund as a method for creating
new parking resources, including a new parking garage.
14
November 2006
•
Encourage residential units in the downtown on the third floor of existing three-story
buildings or in new construction.
•
Create entrance “gateways” at key locations to welcome visitors and residents into the
downtown.
•
Create a business retention, enhancement and expansion program that works to retain
existing businesses and identifies and markets the Summit CRBD to desirable new
businesses.
•
Establish more detailed design standards as part of the City’s Development Regulations
Ordinance.
•
Request that the Summit Historic Preservation Commission develop a list of significant
historic buildings in the CRBD.
•
Offer assistance with the development process in the CRBD to developers, landlords,
merchants, and residents through the Department of Community Services.
Implementation of the CRBD Master Plan continues to be discussed and Council has appointed a task
force to make recommendations. The task force is in the process of drafting a report that prioritizes the
CRBD Master Plan recommendations and identifies appropriate next steps for implementation.
Overlook Hospital
Since the preparation of Master Plan 2000, Overlook Hospital has developed a campus master plan,
and has constructed a new emergency entrance and a new neuroscience facility. A new Medical
Arts Center building (MAC II), cancer center and redesigned main entrance are currently under
construction. In addition, the hospital has sold off some of its properties on Walnut Avenue.
Redevelopment is no longer being contemplated for the Overlook area.
This report reaffirms the
assessment of Master Plan 2000 that the PI Professional-Institutional zone district was established with
specific boundaries designed to limit the encroachment of the uses within the district into adjacent
residential areas. The purchase and sale of properties by Overlook in adjacent neighborhoods should
be carefully monitored. In addition, “affordable” workforce housing should be considered in this area.
Concerns regarding traffic circulation and pedestrian safety are being addressed through the campus
master plan and should continue to be addressed.
15
November 2006
Schering-Plough
The Schering-Plough site was rezoned from RO-15 and LI to a new zone, PROD Planned Research
Office Development. In December 2005, the City approved Schering-Plough’s General Development
Plan. In April 2006, Schering-Plough obtained approval for a five-level, 1,351 space parking deck.
Celgene
The Celgene (formerly Celanese) site was rezoned from RO-15 to a new zone, PROD-2 Planned
Research Office Development. Celgene is in the process of preparing a Facilities Master Plan as
recommended in Master Plan 2000.
Summit Medical Group
Summit Medical Group has recently vacated its facility on DeForest Avenue. The City is in the process
of reviewing a request to rezone the Summit Medical Group site to include a mix of uses.
Summit Hospital
The Summit Hospital site was subdivided, with the Morris Avenue frontage rezoned to B-1 and the
remainder of the site rezoned to a new TH-2 Townhouse-2 zone.
Although the Summit Hospital
property was approved for a 24-unit townhouse development, the property was subsequently sold and
continues to be used as a medical facility.
Additional Updates since Master Plan 2000/2003 Reexamination Report
•
The issue of appropriate FAR standards in residential zones is one that requires further review.
The Zoning Board of Adjustment has studied this issue and addressed it in their annual report;
revisions are occurring.
•
The City has amended its steep slope ordinance.
•
The City is currently in the process of creating a comprehensive Geographic Information
System (GIS) which will provide base mapping of the entire City.
•
The need for affordable housing and senior housing will be addressed in the Housing Element
of this report.
•
A through-lot ordinance was adopted on September 5, 2001.
•
The total side yard setback requirements in the R-25 and R-40 zones were increased when
the DRO was revised in December 2003.
16
November 2006
C. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THERE HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN ASSUMPTIONS,
POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES FORMING THE BASIS FOR THTE MASTER PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS AS LAST REVISED, WITH PARTICULAR REGARD TO THE DENSITY AND
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION AND LAND USES, HOUSING CONDITIONS, CIRCULATION,
CONSERVATION
OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES,
ENERGY
CONSERVATION,
COLLECTION,
DISPOSITION AND RECYCLING OF DESIGNATED RECYCLABLE MATERIALS, AND CHANGES IN
STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES.
Continued sensitivity is required in balancing reuse opportunities in the City with the need to maintain the
character of the City (i.e. sensitivity to “overdevelopment”).
There has been a recent focus throughout the country on implementation of planning principles such as
transit-oriented development design and “Green” building principles. It is recommended that, where
appropriate, both TOD and “Green” principles can be incorporated into the City’s land use and zoning
decisions.
•
“Green” building principles involve sustainable building design, construction and operation and
promote integrated, whole-building design practices.
•
Transit-oriented
development
(TOD)
is
characterized
by
mixed-use,
pedestrian-oriented
development within walking distance of a transit stop.
Potential conflict between businesses and adjacent neighborhood areas continues to be a very sensitive
issue. As a result, there is a need to continue to monitor and refine NB zone boundaries and standards in
order to ensure preservation and upgrade of the NB zones. In addition, there are concerns regarding
traffic and circulation impacts of non-profits in residential neighborhoods.
17
November 2006
D. RECOMMENDATIONS
•
Clarify the purpose of the NB Neighborhood Business zone to emphasize its role as a buffer with
an opportunity for small scale businesses to serve the adjacent neighborhood. Businesses should
not encroach on adjacent residential neighborhoods; rather they should complement the
neighborhood in terms of impact and services.
•
Extend the NB zone down Morris Avenue and around the east side of River Road. Existing
conditions, size of lots, and proximity of commercial to adjacent residential uses make it more
appropriate to extend the NB zone along Morris Avenue and River Road.
•
Review permitted uses and regulations for NB zones to ensure compatibility with purpose of
zone.
•
Further study is recommended regarding the appropriateness of the LI zone. The impact of a fully
occupied Schering Plough campus and the redeveloped site of the former Novartis Training
Center on Morris Avenue on the area should be monitored. Consideration should be given to
revising some of the uses permitted in the LI zone to include some B uses such as auto sales.
•
The Business zone on Franklin Place should be rezoned to a residential use. The Infiniti auto
dealership has vacated their premises and Summit Truck Body has gotten a variance to build
residential units.
•
In light of the rezoning recommendations for Franklin Place and the Salerno Duane site on Broad
Street, the Business zone bordered by Summit Avenue, the railroad tracks, Walnut Street and
Park Avenue is an area that requires further study.
•
Appropriate residential infill development in established neighborhoods remains an issue in the
City. Bulk and design standards in the residential zones should be studied and amended where
necessary to ensure that new residential infill is appropriate in terms of scale and character with
the surrounding neighborhood.
•
Drive-through uses, such as banks, pharmacies, etc. should not be permitted in B zones.
•
Consider allowing some personal services, such as personal trainers and tutors, as uses in the
CRBD except on the ground floor.
•
The standards of the Office Residential Character (ORC) zones should be reviewed in light of the
original intent of creating this zone to preserve residential structures.
•
There has recently been interest on the part of redevelopers to reuse two key sites within Summit.
The two rezoning requests involve the Summit Medical Group and Salerno Duane sites. There
has been an extensive public outreach process regarding the rezoning of these two sites, as well
18
November 2006
as significant discussion with the Land Use Subcommittee and full Master Plan Reexamination
Subcommittee, in addition to extensive collaboration between the current proposed developers
and City staff regarding the reuse of and proposed standards for the two sites.
It should be noted that one of the key issues in the City during the preparation of Master Plan
2000 was “overdevelopment”. Master Plan 2000 included several recommendations intended
to address intensity of development, such as the recommendation to “downzone” several areas
adjacent to the B zone along DeForest Avenue and on the easterly side of Summit Avenue from
Multi-Family Tower to Multi-Family. The Summit Medical Group site was specifically addressed in
Master Plan 2000, particularly with regard to appropriate contextual considerations, as follows:
“The Summit Medical Group facility is located in the block of Summit Avenue, DeForest Avenue,
Parmley Place and Beechwood Road.
The site is overcrowded and the Medical Group has
evaluated options to address this overcrowding, including expansion of its present facility. Any
future expansion plans should be carefully considered in light of its impact on the adjacent
residential neighborhood.”
Since the preparation of Master Plan 2000, intensity of development/”overdevelopment” has
become an even greater issue in the City. The standards recommended below for the Summit
Medical Group and Salerno Duane sites are an attempt to strike a balance between feasible,
realistic reuse and “overdevelopment”, which was clearly an issue in the public outreach process.
It is recommended that both the Summit Medical Group and Salerno Duane sites be rezoned and
that a Gateway zone be created that serves to complement and support the CRBD, complement
and protect the adjacent residential neighborhoods, provide housing in proximity to public
transportation and serve as attractive gateways to the downtown.
o
For the Summit Medical Group site, it is recommended that a new Gateway I zone be
created that places the site in one zone/land use category (currently the site is located in
Multi-Family Tower 1 and Multi-Family zones), modestly increases the density allowed
and incorporates the following objectives and planning and zoning guidelines:
ƒ
Reuse of existing site and “grandfathering” of existing building with regard to
height and setbacks.
19
November 2006
ƒ
The entire site must be reused in an integrated way and a comprehensive
“master” plan for the entire site must be submitted, although it is understood that
there may be phasing of development.
ƒ
This is a “gateway” site and should be designed as such. As a “gateway” site,
streetscapes and aesthetics are key to the reuse of the site.
ƒ
FAR for the site should be consistent with the bulk and design standards
proposed in this Reexamination Report.
ƒ
The existing office building and any building located at the corner of DeForest
Avenue and Beechwood Road may contain either office or residential uses, or
a combination of both. Only residential uses shall be permitted on the rest of
the site.
ƒ
No medical uses shall be permitted on the site.
ƒ
Parking for all uses, including the existing building, must be provided on-site
either in structured or underground parking (with the possible exception of
townhomes).
ƒ
Any parking structure on the site must be screened from public view.
Any
portion of a parking structure that fronts Summit Avenue must be “wrapped” with
a “veneer” of development and designed in such a way that it blends in
architecturally with other buildings on the site.
ƒ
To the extent possible, topography and grade should be used as a resource in
the design of parking and access.
ƒ
The setbacks along DeForest Avenue should be consistent with the setback of
the existing building (approximately 5-7 feet) in order to accommodate some
type of landscaping to “soften” the edge of the site.
ƒ
A buffer between 25 and 40 feet should be required along the entire Summit
Avenue frontage of the site in order to maintain consistency with the sizable
“green” front yard setbacks which currently exist along the Summit Avenue
corridor.
ƒ
A buffer area between 10 and 20 feet should be required where Lots 1 and 2
in Block 2607 abut adjacent Lot 7. No encroachments, such as patios or
decks, should be permitted in the buffer area.
ƒ
A maximum height of 48 feet/4 stories should be permitted. Parking levels
should not be counted toward the story limitation, however, they should be
20
November 2006
counted toward the overall height limitation. Townhouses should have a
maximum height of 40 feet/3 stories.
ƒ
A 20% set-aside of affordable housing on-site and integrated throughout the
entire project is strongly recommended.
ƒ
The Parmley Place right-of-way should not be vacated.
ƒ
Every effort should be made to increase the amount of green space that
currently exists on-site.
ƒ
o
The use of “green” building practices is encouraged.
It is recommended that the Salerno Duane site be placed in a new Gateway II zone that
shares the objectives of the Gateway I zone but has standards that are more specific to
the site. The following are the recommended planning and zoning guidelines:
•
The "reuse" of the site is a challenge due to the linear dimensions of the site, its
proximity to the railroad, its topography and the possibility that the above-grade
freight line that bisects the site may be reactivated in the future. As such, the
proper design of the site is critical.
•
This is a "gateway" site and should be designed as such. As a "gateway" site,
streetscapes and aesthetics are key to the reuse of the site.
•
The site has significant topography and grade which should be used as a
resource in the design of parking and access.
•
Parking for all uses must be provided on-site either in structured or underground
parking (with the possible exception of townhomes). To the extent possible,
parking should be under the building or below grade in order to maximize the
extent of "green" on the site.
•
Any parking structure on the site must be screened from public view.
•
Although grade can be used to offset the perception of height, height on this site
should be limited to 4 stories and a maximum of 48 feet. Parking levels should
not be counted toward the story limitation, however, they should be counted
toward the overall height limitation. Townhouses should have a maximum height
of 40 feet/3 stories.
•
FAR for the site should be consistent with the bulk and design standards
proposed in this Reexamination Report.
21
November 2006
•
Mixed uses should be permitted on the site with small, "neighborhood business"
uses permitted at street level and residential uses above.
•
The site should be evaluated in context to the surrounding uses. In particular,
since a City-owned surface parking lot abuts the site there is an opportunity to
explore a creative public/private parking partnership.
•
No parking should be permitted between the street line and the building and
there should be a front yard setback between 10 and 20 feet in order to "green"
the streetscape.
•
Any development must address the traffic issues in the area and must be
coordinated with all planned traffic improvements.
•
A 20% set-aside of affordable housing on-site and integrated throughout the
entire project is strongly recommended.
•
Every effort should be made to increase the amount of green space on-site.
•
The use of "green" building practices is encouraged.
22
November 2006
III. REEXAMINATION OF HOUSING ELEMENT/FAIR SHARE PLAN
A. THE MAJOR PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES RELATED TO HOUSING IN SUMMIT AT THE TIME
OF THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003 REEXAMINATION REPORT.
•
To address the City’s COAH obligations.
23
November 2006
B.
THE EXTENT TO WHICH SUCH PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES HAVE BEEN REDUCED OR
HAVE INCREASED SINCE THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003
REEXAMINATION REPORT.
•
The Planning Board adopted a Housing Element/Fair Share Plan in 2000. The plan
recommended eliminating Mt. Laurel overlay zoning, establishing a rehabilitation program and
entering into a Regional Contribution Agreement (RCA) with a receiving community. Subsequent to
the Plan’s adoption, the City entered into a RCA with the City of Elizabeth for 26 units, set up a
rehabilitation program that is administered through the Summit Housing Authority and adopted a
Developer Fee Ordinance as a means to raise some of the funding obligations necessitated by the
City’s Housing Plan.
•
A Mt. Laurel lawsuit was filed against the City seeking a builder’s remedy on property that was
previously the Stephens Miller Lumber Yard. This litigation was settled with the Court approval of a
plan for significantly reduced densities (8 units per acre versus 16 units per acre). The settlement
required the applicant to pay $120,000 into the City’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund. The City
also negotiated additional monies to be paid into the Trust Fund if the sales prices exceeded
certain dollar amounts.
•
In March 2001, a lawsuit was filed seeking a Builders Remedy on a 5 acre site on Glenside
Avenue known as the Landmark property. The property was consistently deemed unsuitable by the
City for Mt. Laurel development. During 2002, the State Planning Commission extended the
Critical Environmental Site (CES) designation to the entire parcel recognizing the existence of
steep slopes and wellhead protection. This litigation was resolved within the last year. Through a
collaborative effort with the City, the County Open Space Trust Fund and State Green Acres
program, the site has been purchased and earmarked as public open space.
•
COAH has adopted regulations for the third housing cycle that became effective in December
2004 and that established responsibilities for municipalities for the third cycle. As required by
COAH III Regulations and as part of the settlement with Landmark, the City adopted an amended
Fair Share Plan and a Growth Share Ordinance in December 2005. The City continues to move
forward with implementing the Fair Share Plan.
It is also responding to the Court Master’s
comments with respect to the Fair Share Plan.
24
November 2006
•
The City is evaluating potential rehabilitation of existing units and the creation of new units in the
CRBD as well as other affordable housing opportunities throughout the City.
•
A number of stakeholders in the City have indicated that affordable housing is a community goal;
however, it is their position that the City should not enter into any additional Regional Contribution
Agreements (RCA’s). There is no provision for any additional RCA’s in the current Fair Share Plan
as adopted.
•
A number of stakeholders have also expressed that a greater housing need exists for the lowest
income residents of the City.
•
Pursuant to the Cycle III regulations the City has increased the fee in its developer fee ordinance
from 0.5 percent to 1 percent for residential and from 1 percent to 2 percent for nonresidential.
•
The City has also adopted a growth share ordinance as permitted by COAH’s Cycle III
regulations. Thereafter, COAH published a model ordinance. The City has not yet adopted a
revised growth share ordinance reflecting its current plans and/or taking advantage of the
concepts set forth in the COAH model.
25
November 2006
C. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THERE HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN ASSUMPTIONS,
POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES FORMING THE BASIS FOR THTE MASTER PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS AS LAST REVISED, WITH PARTICULAR REGARD TO THE DENSITY AND
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION AND LAND USES, HOUSING CONDITIONS, CIRCULATION,
CONSERVATION
OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES,
ENERGY
CONSERVATION,
COLLECTION,
DISPOSITION AND RECYCLING OF DESIGNATED RECYCLABLE MATERIALS, AND CHANGES IN
STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES.
•
An objective of the City is to continue its tradition of providing a variety of housing types designed
to support and address the housing needs of a diverse population representing a variety of
income groups. The Summit Interfaith Council and other charitable organizations have expressed
willingness to work with the City to attain diversity of housing options in the City and the economic
diversity, which that range of housing reinforces. Such public/ private partnerships can be
instrumental in realizing affordable housing initiatives and should be encouraged.
•
An Affordable Housing Committee has been established which is addressing the implementation
of the City’s Fair Share Plan. The Affordable Housing Committee includes City representatives and
professionals, Common Council representatives, Planning Board representatives and Housing
Authority representatives. Pursuant to COAH III regulations, the Summit Housing Authority has
recently been identified as the administrative agency for implementing the Fair Share Plan.
•
COAH has adopted regulations for the third housing cycle that became effective in December
2004 and that established responsibilities for municipalities for the third cycle. Those regulations
created new responsibilities for the third cycle. These new regulations also authorize an increased
fee and the adoption of a growth share ordinance. These new regulations also created new
compliance techniques and encouraged creativity.
26
November 2006
D.
THE SPECIFIC CHANGES RECOMMENDED FOR THE MASTER PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS, IF ANY, INCLUDING UNDERLYING OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND STANDARDS,
OR WHETHER A NEW PLAN OR REGULATIONS SHOULD BE PREPARED.
•
The City should continue to aggressively move forward with implementing the Fair Share Plan and
at the same time respond to the Court Master’s comments. The City should continue to seek
opportunities for providing affordable housing, with particular emphasis on identifying and
realizing opportunities to provide affordable housing for low income households and housing
options for senior citizens. Public/private partnerships should be encouraged.
•
It is desired that, to the extent possible, any Mt. Laurel units required as a result of a residential
development will be built and integrated within the development. It is further recognized that
certain commercial development may trigger a growth share obligation. It is understood that it
may not be practical for the developer to locate housing within a commercial site and therefore it
will be the responsibility of the developer to provide an alternative plan for complying with the
growth share obligation. If the units are to be built, purchased or paid for by the commercial
developer to fulfill the growth share obligation, the primary preference for location of these units
shall be within the City.
•
The City should also take advantage of the opportunity to examine the COAH model growth
share ordinance issued in December, 2005 and review its current plans and consider adopting a
revised growth share ordinance to facilitate the provision of affordable housing.
27
November 2006
IV. REEXAMINATION OF CIRCULATION PLAN ELEMENT
A. THE MAJOR PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES RELATED TO CIRCULATION IN SUMMIT AT THE
TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003 REEXAMINATION REPORT.
Circulation Objectives:
•
To encourage the location and design of transportation and circulation routes which will promote
the free flow of traffic in appropriate locations while seeking ways to address congestion and
unsafe roadway conditions.
•
To channel through traffic to major streets and discourage it in residential neighborhoods.
•
To provide for adequate parking and adequate loading and unloading facilities.
•
To improve and expand pedestrian and bicycle connections.
•
To relieve traffic congestion in the CRBD.
•
To encourage the use of mass transit.
•
To implement streetscape, parking and traffic improvements proposed by the SID.
Circulation Plan Recommendations:
•
The Citywide Traffic Study should:
-
Identify/study and analyze major traffic routes, traffic accident data, key intersections and
traffic signal requirements and/or modifications.
-
Analyze pattern of speed limits and recommend speed limit changes where appropriate
-
Project future anticipated growth in traffic volumes.
-
Analyze pedestrian and vehicular safety issues including these concerns at the City’s private
and public schools.
-
Propose short- and long-term capital improvement priorities including sidewalks, road
widening, and traffic signalizations.
-
Estimate short- and long-term costs of recommended improvements, including traffic calming
techniques where possible.
-
Analyze the availability and effectiveness of mass transportation as well as alternative modes
of travel.
-
Review the City’s plans for parking requirements, both short- and long-term, to accommodate
the needs of the CRBD, adjacent Business Zone and Neighborhood Business Zones.
28
November 2006
•
Adequate resources should continually be appropriated to upgrade and maintain the roadway
infrastructure.
•
Sufficient City personnel are needed for traffic enforcement.
•
Alternate modes of transportation, especially bikes and pedestrians, including additional
sidewalks and provisions for bike travel with technical and financial support from NJDOT need to
be addressed. Public awareness education, participation and support are critical.
•
Traffic circulation and safety needs a comprehensive approach.
29
November 2006
B.
THE EXTENT TO WHICH SUCH PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES HAVE BEEN REDUCED OR
HAVE INCREASED SINCE THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003
REEXAMINATION REPORT.
•
Traffic and pedestrian safety are still major issues in the City; there have been a number of
pedestrian accidents in the downtown and a recent fatality that has brought this to the forefront.
•
The City continues to address cut through traffic and speeding in residential neighborhoods.
•
The lack of sidewalks under the railroad overpass on Springfield Avenue serves as a significant
physical barrier to pedestrians walking from east Summit up to the downtown. NJDOT made a
proposal to straighten the roadway on both sides of the overpass, install sidewalks along one side
of the overpass and install sidewalks along Springfield Avenue. The City did not support the
proposed DOT improvements as a realistic improvement to pedestrian safety due to the narrow
roadway under the overpass. In the future, NJ Transit should accommodate the installation of
sidewalks when it replaces the bridge.
•
There are no sidewalks along the residential portions of Broad Street by Hill City cleaners and
Denman Place; this creates additional travel challenges to the pedestrians. As part of the Broad
Street Corridor road improvement project, the City should work with the County to improve and
expand the sidewalk network along Broad Street from Ashwood Avenue to Denman Place.
•
In order to improve visibility at intersections, the DRO was amended to limit the height of plantings
within sight triangles at intersections and to restrict their location to within 10 feet of the edge of
the road.
•
Parking continues to be an issue in the CRBD. Any new parking initiatives should take into account
the recent relocation of the Summit Medical Group and the parking impact of any new use of this
site.
•
The City has completed downtown project amenities that reinforce the pedestrian oriented nature
of the CRBD including wider sidewalks, cobblestone crosswalks, pedestrian crossing cones and
the roundabout on Union Place.
30
November 2006
•
The City’s Parking Services Agency has implemented various parking improvements including
designated on-street employee parking; designated employee parking in the Broad Street garage;
the introduction of Smart Card payment options; and 15 minute “Express” parking spaces on
Union Place.
•
Current and planned construction projects/roadway improvements:
o
Completed: Traffic light installed at Summit Avenue/DeForest Avenue; traffic signals at
Broad Street/Ashwood Avenue, Morris Avenue/Ashwood Avenue, Broad Street/Maple
Street have been upgraded; pedestrian safety and aesthetic improvements were made
along Springfield Avenue and Union Place in conjunction with downtown streetscape
project; a new bridge over the Passaic River at River Road and Passaic Avenue was
constructed.
Traffic
calming
and
pedestrian
safety
improvements
at
Ashland
Road/Mountain Avenue/Plymouth Road intersection; major redesign of Glenside
Avenue/Morris Avenue intersection with new signals at Mountain Avenue/Morris
Avenue, Glenside Avenue/Morris Avenue and Glenside Avenue/Baltusrol Road as part
of County’s Morris Avenue Corridor project; joint Union/Morris County reconstruction of
Mt. Vernon Avenue bridge.
o
Planned: Broad Street Corridor project; new traffic signal at Broad Street/Springfield
Avenue.
•
A City-wide Traffic Study and an NJDOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Study were completed by Louis
Berger Group in 2002; many of the recommended roadway improvements and school safety
initiatives have been completed or are in progress.
•
An Alternate Modes of Transportation Task Force was appointed to review and make
recommendations regarding implementing the 2002 NJDOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Study. The
Alternate Modes of Transportation Task Force developed a map and brochure detailing a bike
route connecting several public parks; the Board of Recreation Master Plan makes
recommendations for additional bike routes.
•
The City has installed comprehensive wayfinding signage.
31
November 2006
•
New, uniform signage and roadway markings were installed at all public schools and flashing
beacons were installed at several schools. In addition, areas have been designated at several
schools to ease traffic flow during drop-off and pick-up hours.
•
The Police Department has formed a dedicated Traffic and Special Services Bureau which focuses
on traffic enforcement in areas of speeding and pedestrian safety.
•
Accident data for 2005 was obtained from the Summit Police Department. The following table
identifies the fifteen intersections with the highest reported number of motor vehicle accidents. Of
the fifteen intersections, six of them (Glenside Avenue/Morris Avenue, Ashwood Avenue/Morris
Avenue, River Road/Morris Avenue, Morris Avenue/Mountain Avenue, Glenside Avenue/Henry
Street and Kent Place/Morris Avenue) are due to be totally re-engineered with different traffic flow
configuration and new traffic lights that will be synchronized.
These improvements will be
completed as part of the Morris Avenue Corridor Project and should decrease the reported
amount of accidents at these locations.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Intersection
180 River Road
Glenside Avenue/Morris Avenue
Broad Street/Summit Avenue
Summit Avenue/Springfield Avenue
Broad Street/Springfield Avenue
Ashwood Avenue/Morris Avenue
River Road/Morris Avenue
Broad Street/Middle Avenue
River Road/Passaic Avenue
Maple Street/Springfield Avenue
Mountain Avenue/Morris Avenue
Glenside Avenue/Henry Street
Broad Street/Maple Street
Kent Place Boulevard/Morris Avenue
Broad Street/Walnut Street
32
Total Reportable Crashes
24
22
19
13
11
11
10
10
10
8
7
7
7
6
6
November 2006
C. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THERE HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN ASSUMPTIONS,
POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES FORMING THE BASIS FOR THTE MASTER PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS AS LAST REVISED, WITH PARTICULAR REGARD TO THE DENSITY AND
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION AND LAND USES, HOUSING CONDITIONS, CIRCULATION,
CONSERVATION
OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES,
ENERGY
CONSERVATION,
COLLECTION,
DISPOSITION AND RECYCLING OF DESIGNATED RECYCLABLE MATERIALS, AND CHANGES IN
STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES.
Traffic, parking, and pedestrian safety are still major issues in the City. The City continues its efforts to
channel through traffic to major streets & discourage traffic in residential neighborhoods, provide for
adequate parking, improve and expand pedestrian and bicycle connections, and improve pedestrian and
vehicular safety.
There are several development projects proposed adjacent to the CRBD including the Summit Medical
Group site, the Salerno Duane auto dealership site and the Infiniti auto dealership site. These projects
need to be carefully assessed as to their impact on parking and circulation.
33
November 2006
D.
THE SPECIFIC CHANGES RECOMMENDED FOR THE MASTER PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS, IF ANY, INCLUDING UNDERLYING OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND STANDARDS,
OR WHETHER A NEW PLAN OR REGULATIONS SHOULD BE PREPARED.
•
Continue to encourage the use of alternate modes of transportation by expanding safe walking
and biking opportunities with technical and financial support from NJDOT.
Per the Board of
Recreation Master Plan, any proposed bike route should be designed in compliance with the
requirements and recommendations of NJDOT and ASHTO to ensure acceptance for potential
grant funding.
•
Establish an effective Sidewalk Location Policy to address gaps in sidewalk networks and
pedestrian safety concerns as well as set forth criteria for prioritizing and funding sidewalk
installation projects.
•
Work in conjunction with the County on the Broad Street Corridor project.
Implement the
redesigning of the block of Broad Street between Ashwood Avenue, Park Avenue, and Denman
Place with a safe sidewalk and pedestrian-friendly streetscape to connect east Summit with the
train station, hospital and downtown.
•
Work to improve sight distance at critical intersections, where possible.
•
In the Neighborhood Business zones, encourage the redevelopment of commercial properties to
include on-site parking and loading located in rears of lots and consider implementing traffic
calming measures (e.g. better identification of crosswalks) to make these areas more pedestrian
friendly.
•
The integration of a GIS system as a long term planning tool for traffic and pedestrian safety
improvements should be evaluated.
•
The City continues to oppose the proposed reactivation of the Rahway Valley freight line.
34
November 2006
V. REEXAMINATION OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES PLAN ELEMENT
A. THE MAJOR PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES RELATED TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES IN SUMMIT
AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003 REEXAMINATION
REPORT.
Community Facility Objectives:
•
To provide community services which address the changing demographic characteristics of the
population (e.g. schools, day care facilities, recreation facilities, senior centers).
•
To provide an effective array of recreational and cultural programs and opportunities for all
segments of the community.
•
To coordinate the construction of improvements with the City's Capital Improvement Program so
that community facilities are available when needed.
•
To encourage the placement of public art in strategic locations throughout the City.
•
To efficiently use school facilities where possible, both as schools and recreational resources.
•
To integrate the goals and objectives of the City's recently adopted Strategic Plan, wherever
appropriate, with the goals and objectives of Master Plan 2000.
Community Facility Recommendations:
•
The City should continue providing proper maintenance to municipal facilities and capital funding
for upgrades and improvements as necessary. Such short-term investment now can preclude the
need for more substantial and costly improvements in the long term.
•
The City should develop recommendations for capital improvements for other public and quasipublic entities in the City such as NJ Transit, Union County and the utility companies. These
entities impact upon the City facilities, and therefore, coordination is a key component.
•
Efforts should be made to work cooperatively with surrounding municipalities since many issues
affecting Summit are regional in nature. This is particularly the case with respect to public utility
issues since the City will be faced with addressing significant technological changes in the future.
35
November 2006
B.
THE EXTENT TO WHICH SUCH PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES HAVE BEEN REDUCED OR
HAVE INCREASED SINCE THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003
REEXAMINATION REPORT.
•
The City has completed renovation of the Summit Recreation Center (formerly the Edison
Recreation Center) at 100 Morris Avenue. The Recreation Center now houses the offices of the
Recreation Department and hosts a variety of recreational activities, including activities for senior
citizens.
•
Some senior citizens have asked the City for a separate facility completely dedicated to senior
activities; however, the City is still in the early stages of considering this request.
•
The Department of Public Works now has primary responsibility for maintaining and administering
athletic fields throughout Summit, in cooperation with the Recreation Department and the Board of
Education.
•
The City operates a youth center at 2 Walnut Street that offers after-school and weekend
programs for children in grades 6 through 12. It is a short walk from the Middle School and is
open 6 days a week year-round.
•
The Mayor’s Partnership for Summit Arts was established in 2004 and charged with identifying
the best opportunities for art throughout the community. Summit Arts’ first permanent project was
the installation of faceted glass fine art panels in the bus shelters along Broad Street. Summit Arts
has also sponsored a program of temporary sculpture displays in various outdoor locations in the
City. Funding for all Summit Arts initiatives is from private and foundation donations.
•
Space for municipal files, archives and technology (such as servers and telecom equipment) is a
recurring theme, which suggests that some overall solutions are warranted.
•
A task force on accessibility issued a report that recommended ways to improve accessibility at
City facilities.
•
Although parking garages nominally fall under the Community Facilities Element, it is more logical
to consider them in concert with on-street parking. Therefore, all parking matters will be discussed
in detail in the section of this Report dealing with the Central Retail Business District (CRBD) under
the Land Use Element.
•
The Board of Education is in the process of consolidating all of the district’s pre-school and
kindergarten programs at an expanded Jefferson School and a renovated Wilson School. As
part of the proposed plans, the school district’s administrative offices are to be relocated from
Lawton C. Johnson Summit Middle School to the renovated Wilson School.
36
November 2006
•
Major additions and renovations to Brayton School and the High School have been completed.
•
Significant traffic flow and parking issues continue at some schools, impacting surrounding
neighborhoods.
•
Major facilities improvements are being planned at Kent Place and Oak Knoll Schools.
•
St. Teresa’s Church has established an early childhood center.
The availability of quality
preschools is an important component of overall educational opportunities in Summit.
•
There have been upgrades to non-profits in Summit such as the new SAGE building and the
expanded Center for Visual Arts.
•
A detailed discussion of all recreation upgrades and improvements can be found in the
Recreation and Open Space Element of this report.
37
November 2006
C. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THERE HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN ASSUMPTIONS,
POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES FORMING THE BASIS FOR THE MASTER PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS AS LAST REVISED, WITH PARTICULAR REGARD TO THE DENSITY AND
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION AND LAND USES, HOUSING CONDITIONS, CIRCULATION,
CONSERVATION
OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES,
ENERGY
CONSERVATION,
COLLECTION,
DISPOSITION AND RECYCLING OF DESIGNATED RECYCLABLE MATERIALS, AND CHANGES IN
STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES.
Since the preparation of the previous Master Plan, there has been an increasing focus on the arts of the
City and, as such, inventorying cultural resources has become a new objective of the Master Plan.
In recent years the public school system has been experiencing a steady increase in enrollments in
elementary schools, which in turn will lead to corresponding increases in the middle school and high
school. These increases have been addressed by expansion or modification projects at almost all public
schools. Public school enrollment statistics and projections for the period 2001-2009 can be found in the
chart below.
Summit School System Trend Enrollment Data 2001-2009
Grade
Pre K
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
2001
46
252
307
268
279
312
275
267
256
254
217
201
181
169
3285
2002
70
262
287
304
262
272
313
269
265
259
231
222
192
177
3355
2003
51
253
298
295
317
266
277
306
258
277
253
223.5
225.5
194.5
3497.5
2004
51
273
325
296
291
321
270
269
317
263
254
244
224
221
3632
2005
57
227
354
325
299
279
313
270
252
321
265
249
243
224
3678
2006*
63
258
274
355
327
298
280
308
265
254
312
262
246
241
3742*
2007*
63
236
311
275
358
326
299
276
302
267
247
308
258
244
3769*
2008*
64
251
285
312
277
356
327
295
271
305
260
244
304
256
3805*
2009*
64
243
303
286
314
276
358
322
289
273
296
256
241
302
3822*
* Projected numbers
Source: Summit Board of Education
38
November 2006
D.
THE SPECIFIC CHANGES RECOMMENDED FOR THE MASTER PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS, IF ANY, INCLUDING UNDERLYING OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND STANDARDS,
OR WHETHER A NEW PLAN OR REGULATIONS SHOULD BE PREPARED.
•
Evaluate whether a separate Cultural Arts Element would be appropriate as part of the City’s next
Master Plan.
•
Address the impact of enrollment projections and the subsequent need for additional and/or
renovated school facilities.
•
Work with public and private schools to address parking and traffic issues and lessen the impact
on surrounding neighborhoods.
•
Implement, where appropriate, the recommendations of the ADA task force regarding community
facilities, including public schools.
39
November 2006
VI. REEXAMINATION OF RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE PLAN ELEMENT
A. THE MAJOR PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES RELATED TO RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE
IN SUMMIT AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003
REEXAMINATION REPORT AND THE 2003 REEXAMINATION REPORT.
Recreation and Open Space Objectives:
•
To identify as open space/recreation certain public and private lands that serve as open
space, buffers, streetscape or vistas; and/or are in a strategic location as it relates to existing
parks and recreation.
•
To preserve and enhance park and recreation facilities, where appropriate, within the City to
meet the needs and demands of present and future residents.
•
To explore the creation of a linear park along the Passaic River.
•
To create physical links, where feasible, between City parks and the County park system.
Recreation and Open Space Recommendations:
•
Maintenance and upgrading, where necessary, of the existing parks network.
•
Explore opportunities to create physical links among residential neighborhoods, City parks
and the County park system. In particular, the right-of-way along the Rahway Valley rail line
can connect residential neighborhoods in East Summit to both Briant and Hidden Valley Parks.
•
Proposed acquisition of 12 identified parcels designated on the Open Space/Recreation
Plan Map as proposed open space, consisting of:
-
New Jersey American Water parcel
-
Landmark property
-
Strip of property, between NJ Transit lines, along Passaic Avenue
-
The Dell
-
Wilson School property
-
Red Cross property
-
Railroad right-of-way off the main line from Broad Street to the Springfield border
-
Italian American Club property off of Morris Avenue adjacent to the railroad right-of-way
-
Overlook parking lot at the corner of Morris Avenue and Mountain Avenue
-
Schering property adjacent to training center on Morris Avenue
-
Transfer Station property
-
Parcel on River Road
40
November 2006
B. THE EXTENT TO WHICH SUCH PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES HAVE BEEN REDUCED OR HAVE
INCREASED SINCE THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003 REEXAMINATION
REPORT.
•
The 5-acre Landmark property was acquired by Union County through Green Acres funding, the
Open Space Trust Fund and contribution from the City of Summit.
•
Union County has purchased the 63-acre New Jersey American Water parcel through the County
Open Space Trust Fund.
•
The City of Summit currently has a long term lease with the County on the 53 acre Transfer Station
property and is currently working on plans to develop the site for active and passive recreational
purposes.
•
Tatlock Field has been turfed with an artificial surface and renamed Metro Homes Field in
acknowledgement of a significant private donation that complemented public funding of this
project.
•
Significant improvements have been made to several other recreational facilities – the baseball
field on the recreation center property was renovated in 2003; upper and lower playing fields at
Memorial Field were renovated in 2001; Community Pool was substantially renovated in 2004.
ƒ
The City has completed renovation of the Summit Recreation Center (formerly the Edison
Recreation Center) at 100 Morris Avenue. The Recreation Center now houses the offices of the
Recreation Department and hosts a variety of recreational activities, including activities for senior
citizens.
•
The Wilson School property has been purchased by the Board of Education for use as a primary
center.
•
Railroad right-of-way off the main line from Broad Street to the Springfield border is proposed to
be reactivated.
41
November 2006
•
The Schering property adjacent to the training center on Morris Avenue has been sold to a private
developer.
•
The parcel on River Road has been sold.
•
The Board of Recreation has developed a Master Plan for future improvements to its facilities.
•
The Briant Park Olmsted Conservancy has recently been formed. Per their bylaws: “The Briant
Park Olmsted Conservancy, registered with the State of New Jersey as a non-profit corporation,
has been formed to restore and beautify Briant Park, returning it to a state as close as possible to
its original design as planned by the Olmsted firm.” The group will coordinate their activities with
the Union County Parks Department.
•
The City has a long term lease with the County for open space on Glenside Avenue which has
been developed as youth soccer playing fields. Further upgrades to these facilities are planned.
•
Almost all public and private schools are experiencing an insufficiency of playing fields for their
many sports teams.
42
November 2006
C. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THERE HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN ASSUMPTIONS,
POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES FORMING THE BASIS FOR THTE MASTER PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS AS LAST REVISED, WITH PARTICULAR REGARD TO THE DENSITY AND
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION AND LAND USES, HOUSING CONDITIONS, CIRCULATION,
CONSERVATION
OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES,
ENERGY
CONSERVATION,
COLLECTION,
DISPOSITION AND RECYCLING OF DESIGNATED RECYCLABLE MATERIALS, AND CHANGES IN
STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES.
The City of Summit continues to be committed to providing its residents with quality open space,
recreational facilities and programs. The City has been active in its efforts to improve its open space and
recreation system, including the acquisition of the Landmark property, long-term lease agreements with the
County for the Glenside Avenue fields and the Transfer Station site. Additionally, planning is underway to
develop the Transfer Station site for recreational purposes and to significantly upgrade several active and
passive recreational facilities. The City will continue to actively seek to improve its open space and
recreation system by preserving and enhancing existing facilities, exploring the creation of new facilities
and creating links between City and County parks. Linking parks becomes a greater challenge if the
Rahway Valley freight line becomes reactivated.
43
November 2006
D. THE SPECIFIC CHANGES RECOMMENDED FOR THE MASTER PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS, IF ANY, INCLUDING UNDERLYING OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND STANDARDS,
OR WHETHER A NEW PLAN OR REGULATIONS SHOULD BE PREPARED.
•
Continue to explore recreational uses for the Transfer Station site through the subcommittee that
has been appointed, including the creation of a linear park along the Passaic River.
•
Explore mechanisms, such as public/private partnerships, to encourage and fund the acquisition
of open space parcels, historic sites, conservation and historic easements and enhanced
maintenance of public parks. Continue to seek funding from Union County’s Open Space Trust
Fund, Green Acres and other sources to acquire open space, improve outdoor recreational
facilities and preserve historic sites.
•
Continue to consider use of artificial turf as a means of maximizing limited playing field space
taking into consideration the impact on adjacent residential neighborhoods. Shared use of field
space should be encouraged.
•
Continue to promote physical links between parks, and between parks and neighborhoods.
•
Consider whether additional open space parcels should be identified and added to the list of
parcels designated for proposed open space.
44
November 2006
VII. REEXAMINATION OF CONSERVATION PLAN ELEMENT
A. THE MAJOR PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES RELATED TO CONSERVATION IN SUMMIT AT
THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003 REEXAMINATION
REPORT AND THE 2003 REEXAMINATION REPORT.
Conservation Objectives:
•
To protect natural and environmental resources including floodplains, wetlands, steep slopes, and
aquifer recharge areas and areas suitable for public and quasi-public recreational activities.
•
To identify and preserve environmentally sensitive areas in the City.
•
To encourage the use of conservation easements on environmentally sensitive lands in private
ownership to protect from future disturbance.
•
To conserve treed rights-of-way and institute a tree planting program.
Conservation Recommendations:
•
The City should continue to work with State and County agencies in an effort to acquire or
otherwise preserve the remaining undeveloped land in the City. In particular, an effort should be
made to have the County acquire the two tracts of land along Glenside Avenue that are targeted
for priority acquisition in the Union County Open Space Plan. These parcels, the Water Company
and Landmark sites are surrounded by the Watchung Reservation and contain mature woodlands,
steep slopes and wetlands.
•
The City should work with Union County to evaluate recreational uses for existing county open
space, i.e. the Transfer Station.
•
The City, in coordination with the Environmental Commission, should prepare a Natural Resources
Inventory that identifies the type, location and extent of environmental features in the City.
•
The City should review its current development regulations to ensure that the regulations protect
natural resources and environmentally sensitive areas. In particular, standards for dwelling unit
density, soil removal, steep slopes, tree preservation and storm water management should be
analyzed and modified where appropriate.
•
The City should review its current policies and methodologies in the use of pesticides, fungicides
and herbicides in its parks and on all other public lands. Best Management Practices (BMPs) such
as integrated pest control should be considered. In case of the municipal golf course, BMPs
45
November 2006
should include careful fertilizer use. The City should also work with the counties of Union and
Morris to coordinate pest control efforts and to encourage that they also employ the most
appropriate management practices.
•
The City should continue to balance the growing need to provide adequate active recreation
facilities with the need to preserve land for passive use and purely conservation purposes. Care
must be taken to wisely analyze improvements to park areas.
•
The City should work closely with owners of developed and/or abandoned properties where
contamination may have occurred. Adequate and appropriate remediation plans should be
prepared and implemented, where appropriate.
•
The City should implement the recently adopted tree/conservation/management program.
46
November 2006
B.
THE EXTENT TO WHICH SUCH PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES HAVE BEEN REDUCED OR
HAVE INCREASED SINCE THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003
REEXAMINATION REPORT.
•
The City and County in cooperation with the City and with the assistance of State Green Acres
funding, acquired the 5 acre Landmark Site along Glenside Avenue in 2005. The County also
purchased the 63 acre New Jersey American Water Company site, also along Glenside Avenue
and adjacent to the Watchung Reservation, in 2004. Both sites will be preserved as passive
open space.
•
The City entered into a lease agreement with Union County in 2005 for the 53 acre parcel
partially occupied by the City’s transfer station, recycling, and composting operations. Council
convened a city-wide task force in 2005 to study appropriate ways to restore this site and create
a more fully-featured community recreation and waste management resource, by seeking ways to
add both passive and active recreational amenities to the site while maintaining its existing
recycling and transfer station uses and solving identified environmental issues.
•
The Environmental Commission, with the support of Council and City staff, and under a grant from
the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, completed an Environmental Resource
Inventory in November, 2005.
•
The City, in consultation with numerous organizations including the Environmental Commission,
prepared a Stormwater Management Plan for the City.
The City adopted a Stormwater
Management Ordinance in June 2006.
•
The DRO was amended in 2003 to include lot grading requirements targeted at single and twofamily homes. The ordinance established lot grading standards and requires a grading permit
prior to land disturbance or construction.
•
A Wellhead Protection Ordinance was adopted in June 2005.
•
Revisions to the Steep Slope Ordinance have recently been adopted by Common Council.
47
November 2006
•
A tree ordinance was adopted in October 2006.
•
The Environmental Commission has reviewed existing practices relating to the use of pesticides,
fungicides, and herbicides on public land by means of published articles and discussions held
with representatives of the Board of Education on Integrated Pest Management strategies for
homeowners and schools including the use of Best Management Practices.
•
The City has been recognized as a Tree Planting City for 11 years. The City established a Shade
Tree Advisory Committee in 2005 which, among other things, has drafted a shade tree ordinance
and is updating the inventory of specimen shade trees. The City is continuing its Tree Planting
Program.
•
An aerial survey was completed in the first half of 2006. This survey will be used to develop a
city wide storm drainage plan.
48
November 2006
C. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THERE HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN ASSUMPTIONS,
POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES FORMING THE BASIS FOR THE MASTER PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS AS LAST REVISED, WITH PARTICULAR REGARD TO THE DENSITY AND
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION AND LAND USES, HOUSING CONDITIONS, CIRCULATION,
CONSERVATION
OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES,
ENERGY
CONSERVATION,
COLLECTION,
DISPOSITION, AND RECYCLING OF DESIGNATED RECYCLABLE MATERIALS, AND CHANGES IN
STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES.
The substantially developed character of the City and the fact that much of Summit’s remaining natural
lands are owned and controlled by the County impacts the local conservation objectives outlined in Master
Plan 2000. The Master Plan also recognizes that competing social and economic development objectives,
and even competition between conservation objectives (i.e. active v. passive recreation needs and values),
will require carefully considered balancing.
The Conservation objectives of the City remain relatively consistent with the objectives identified in Master
Plan 2000; one objective has been modified and a new objective has been added. The new objective
deals with the reclamation of brownfields or underutilized properties. Brownfield reclamation was not a
recognized issue in Master Plan 2000, but is an issue the City is now addressing. The modified objective
involves treed rights-of-way and the preservation of landmark trees.
The City’s revised conservation
objectives are as follows:
•
To protect natural and environmental resources including floodplains, wetlands, steep slopes,
and aquifer recharge areas and areas suitable for public and quasi-public recreational
activities.
•
To identify and preserve environmentally sensitive areas in the City.
•
To encourage the use of conservation easements on environmentally sensitive lands in private
ownership to prevent future disturbance.
•
To conserve treed rights-of-way, continue the City’s tree planting program and encourage
protection and replacement of landmark trees.
•
To identify and, where appropriate, facilitate efforts to reclaim brownfields or underutilized
properties.
49
November 2006
D.
THE SPECIFIC CHANGES RECOMMENDED FOR THE MASTER PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS, IF ANY, INCLUDING UNDERLYING OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND STANDARDS,
OR WHETHER A NEW PLAN OR REGULATIONS SHOULD BE PREPARED.
•
Review the lot grading ordinance to confirm that it addresses additional concerns that have been
raised since the ordinance was adopted in 2003.
It is recommended that the City evaluate “green” building and design techniques, such as the U.S.
Green Building Council’s LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Green Building
Rating System, and create a “Green” Master Plan that outlines best practices for a “sustainable”
Summit including building guidelines, expanded recycling initiatives, incentives for energy
conservation, etc. and that encourages public education regarding relevant topics and current
technologies.
•
Several neighborhoods experience flooding during severe storms – the causes of this should be
studied and addressed to the extent appropriate.
50
November 2006
VIII. REEXAMINATION OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN ELEMENT
A. THE MAJOR PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES RELATED TO LAND USE IN SUMMIT AT THE TIME
OF THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003 REEXAMINATION REPORT.
Historic Preservation Objectives:
•
To recognize and preserve the historic character of the City.
•
To explore incentives to encourage the maintenance and façade restoration of historically notable
buildings.
•
To encourage the preservation of historic buildings and landmarks that are significant to Summit’s
past.
The following objectives are identified in the Historic Preservation Plan Element.
1. That it is in the public interest to identify and conserve sites and districts of historic interest.
2. That the designation of historic sites and districts take into consideration not only the age of a structure,
but its historic, cultural, sociological, archeological or architectural significance from a local, regional,
statewide or national perspective.
3. That the inclusion of an historic site or district in this Historic Preservation Plan Element of the Master
Plan be based on the prior identification or formal designation of such historic site or district by the
Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) and Common Council of the City of Summit.
4. That in the review of all applications for development which involve historic sites or districts, and any
sites or districts which have been identified in this Plan Element as potential historic sites or districts,
every effort to be made to preserve the integrity of such sites or districts. The Department of Interior
Standards, along with other relevant preservation standards, should be used as guidelines for review
of applications for development.
5. That the cause of historic preservation be encouraged and through it the protection of the City’s
historic, cultural, sociological, architectural and cultural heritage, with special attention given to
preserving the indigenous historical character, the architecturally significant structures reflective of this
character, and the culturally significant symbolic qualities of older structures and sites.
51
November 2006
6. That the City expresses an admiration for, and encourages an understanding of, the social, economic
and physical forces that created the local physical form and the design of its structure, and the
uniqueness of its sites.
7. That historic preservation is viewed to embrace the general principles and processes of community
planning and design, through which certain social, economic, civic and aesthetic values from historic,
architectural and cultural resources are identified within a context of community growth and
development.
8. That in recognition of the continued and competing forces of growth and development and the
vulnerability of the City’s historic, architectural and cultural heritage to these forces, the City is desirous
of creating a balance in growth that assures the protection of its outstanding historic, architectural and
cultural resources.
9. That in acknowledging that the social, economic, physical and political constraints will prevent efforts
to preserve all significant structures, the City nevertheless needs to protect resources which have
intrinsic merit, aesthetic value or evoke feelings of community loyalty and consciousness of the past
through a sense of time, place and identity.
10. That in recognition of the future opportunities for preservation, the City determines it to be
advantageous to foster the preservation of its historic, architectural and cultural resources, and that in
furtherance of this objective, a study of certain enabling provisions and protective measures should be
undertaken.
11. That in promotion of the values and opportunities of historic preservation, the City can facilitate public
and municipal participation in the historic preservation process, and that it can continue to rely on the
HPC for guidance and advice and to continue its efforts to educate the public about the value of
preservation.
Historic Preservation Recommendations:
•
Formal local designation of the 12 historic districts and 44 individual sites, which were also
mentioned in the 1988 and 1994 Master Plans.
•
Review and comment on all referred building permit applications of buildings 50 years old or
more in the 12 designated historic districts including the Civic Center Historic District and the
44 designated historic sites.
•
Recommendation that a “letter of introduction” be sent to the homeowners of the 44
designated historic sites advising them to consult with the Commission before considering
exterior alterations/additions to their home or building. This is particularly important in the
52
November 2006
case where demolition is being considered. It would contain general educational and
advisory information regarding the Master Plan “community design plan” and about where to
find further information.
•
Continue to review and render advisory comments on all planning and zoning board
applications. Voluntary compliance is encouraged for the sake of good community design as
well as preservation of significant structures.
•
Recommendation that consideration should be given to expanding the Civic Center Historic
District from east to west on Springfield Avenue between Summit and Morris Avenue; and
from north to south on Beechwood Road, Maple Street, and Woodland Avenue between
DeForest and Morris Avenues. For such action to be recommended, the Union County Office
of Cultural and Heritage Affairs should conduct an in-depth Cultural Resources survey.
•
The Commission in consultation with appropriate boards and City agencies should develop
standards, procedures and accompanying forms and expanded design guidelines integrating
its review of zoning and planning board applications with the review process within City
government. Specific areas of concern which need to be addressed include demolition and
“as of right” alterations.
•
The standard used by the Historic Preservation Commission in all cases of review and advice
is the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation & Illustrated Guidelines for
Rehabilitating Historic Buildings and other accepted preservation guideline standards.
Presently, “The Good Neighbor Guidelines – a Primer for Preservation, Restoration &
Renovation” is used by the Commission.
•
Consideration should be given to allowing some flexibility in use, occupancy, or other aspects
of site development if it is determined that such ordinance amendments would serve to
encourage preservation or restoration efforts. As with all other aspects of historic preservation,
any zoning incentives should be carefully conceived and coordinated with the Historic
Preservation Commission to ensure full agreement on their potential benefit prior to
implementation.
•
Any financial incentives through grant or loan programs should be identified and promoted
through the public education process. Incentives should include tax credits for preservation of
facades.
•
Other aspects of the program should be carried out within the advisory, educational and
informational functions of the Commission.
53
November 2006
B. THE EXTENT TO WHICH SUCH PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES HAVE BEEN REDUCED OR
HAVE INCREASED SINCE THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003
REEXAMINATION REPORT.
•
The City of Summit continues to face the problem as to “How to encourage the preservation
of historic buildings and landmarks that are significant to Summit’s past?” This includes historic
homes, business buildings, institutions, etc. Without specific historic designations, the City
does not have the power to avoid teardowns of historic structures other than the goodwill of
the owners. In view of Recommendation #4, the mantra regarding historic preservation that
came out of Master Plan 2000 was “Mandatory Review, Voluntary Compliance.” The
Historic Preservation Commission reviews Planning Board applications and provides its
comments. The Planning Board seeks compliance with their requests when possible.
•
The 44 historic sites identified in Master Plan 2000 represents a core group of buildings
which meet the criteria of “historic preservation as a way to protect the City’s historic,
sociological, architectural and cultural heritage”. Letters of introduction were to be sent out to
the owners of the 44 historic sites, advising them to consult the commission before considering
exterior alterations/additions to their home or building, especially in cases where demolition
is considered. However, these letters were not sent out; the hesitancy was based on the fact
that they may scare the owners into thinking that new restrictions would be placed on them.
•
The Civic Center Historic District was not expanded as recommended by Master Plan 2000.
•
In addition, it was recommended that HPC develop standards, procedures and expanded
design guidelines integrating its review of zoning and planning board applications. The
objective was met in 2004 when HPC published a book “Design and Preservation
Guidelines for Historic Properties in the City of Summit, New Jersey” which replaced the
“Good Neighbors Guidelines“ previously used by the Commission. It is intended to be used
as a guide by anyone who plans on renovating an existing structure or constructing a new
building and who would like a general idea of some of the basic concepts and approaches
to good architectural design and how to properly integrate new additions to older homes.
54
November 2006
•
Because the Historic Preservation Commission is a non regulatory body with limitations,
protection of the 44 sites is not guaranteed. Since Master Plan 2000, 4 of the 44 listed
sites have been demolished. These are – 35 Beekman Road aka “Comstock House”, 706
Springfield Avenue aka “Hayes Tenant House”, 50 Deforest Avenue aka “Dr. Risk House”,
and 50 Passaic Avenue aka “Patrick Hanlon Cottage”.
•
In 2005, a special Historic Preservation Advisory Committee (outside of HPC) was appointed
by Council to investigate ways to prevent any further losses of historic sites.
55
November 2006
C. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THERE HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN ASSUMPTIONS,
POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES FORMING THE BASIS FOR THTE MASTER PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS AS LAST REVISED, WITH PARTICULAR REGARD TO THE DENSITY AND
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION AND LAND USES, HOUSING CONDITIONS, CIRCULATION,
CONSERVATION
OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES,
ENERGY
CONSERVATION,
COLLECTION,
DISPOSITION AND RECYCLING OF DESIGNATED RECYCLABLE MATERIALS, AND CHANGES IN
STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES.
In June 2005, the Common Council established the Historic Preservation Advisory Committee to make
recommendations regarding how to best prevent any further loss of historic sites within the City. In May
2006, the HPAC prepared a report which summarized the status of historic preservation efforts in Summit.
The report highlighted the following major issues:
•
Teardowns of historic buildings is an issue receiving national attention – teardowns erode the
architectural character of a community, and, as such, towns across the country are trying to
preserve their historic character by taking regulatory steps to stop teardowns and impose limits on
what can be built in their place.
•
Summit values its architectural heritage and encourages historic preservation – Summit owes much
of its attractive and distinctive character to the variety of architectural styles found in its
neighborhoods and downtown. Accordingly, the City has taken important steps to preserve its
architectural heritage, including: preparing a Historic Resources survey which was completed in
1990; adopting a historic preservation ordinance in 1995 which created a Historic Preservation
Commission; and the publication of “Design and Preservation Guidelines for Historic Properties”
by the HPC.
•
Historic sites have been demolished – Despite efforts to promote voluntary preservation, several of
the City’s historic sites have recently been lost.
Case studies have indicated that financial
considerations and public support play important roles in the restoration or demolition of historic
structures.
•
Other New Jersey towns have been more proactive – Historic preservation ordinances from other
New Jersey communities were studied, and it was found that many communities designate and
regulate – to varying degrees - historic sites and districts in their ordinances.
56
November 2006
The report concludes as follows: “It is time for Summit to take additional steps to strongly discourage
further loss of our most important historic sites and of their distinguishing architectural features in order to
retain our community’s distinctive character. Current efforts do not provide adequate protection in today’s
economic climate.”
57
November 2006
D.
THE SPECIFIC CHANGES RECOMMENDED FOR THE MASTER PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS, IF ANY, INCLUDING UNDERLYING OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND STANDARDS,
OR WHETHER A NEW PLAN OR REGULATIONS SHOULD BE PREPARED.
•
In the short term, the Historic Preservation Commission should focus its efforts on preserving the 40
remaining individual historic sites and the 2 sites that are on the National and State Registers of
Historic Places.
•
In the longer term, the Master Plan list of historic sites and districts should be updated. Sites that
now qualify as historic should be identified and added to the list (no new sites have been
identified since 1990) and the boundaries and historic significance of the 12 districts should be
reviewed. This work should preferably be done by a professional and grants may be available to
fund it.
•
Add the Downtown Historic District, identified in the 1990 Historic Resources Survey, to the list of
historic districts. This recommendation is intended to be in lieu of the Master Plan 2000
recommendation to expand the Civic Center Historic District.
o
This District was identified and deemed eligible for the National Register in the 1990
Historic Resources Survey but never listed in the Master Plan.
o
Downtown Springfield Avenue has the largest concentration of historic sites.
o
As Council considers implementing the recommendations of the CRBD Master Plan it is
important to recognize the significant contribution of historic buildings and architecture to
the downtown’s distinctive character.
•
Consider creating a set of design guidelines specifically for the CRBD, prepared by the Historic
Preservation Commission. Possible incentives could be created by establishing a point system for
any applicant within the CRBD willing to comply with the HPC guidelines and recommendations.
•
Increase efforts to educate the community about the importance of historic preservation. More
should be done to educate the community about why and how to preserve historic sites and to
increase dialogue between the HPC and historic property owners.
58
November 2006
•
Amend the historic preservation ordinance to give the HPC responsibilities for the identification,
designation and limited regulatory control of historic sites, subject to oversight by Council and the
Planning and Zoning Boards.
o
Regulatory control of historic sites is the most effective way of discouraging the destruction
of these resources.
o
Requiring the HPC to review proposed major changes to Summit’s most historic
landmarks and providing an opportunity for community input would be an important and
effective step for Summit to take to protect its historic heritage.
o
Create a process for identifying and designating historic sites and districts.
o
Formally designate the sites listed in the City’s master plans for the past 12 years.
o
Require HPC review of proposed demolitions, relocations or major exterior alterations of
these designated sites.
•
Consideration should be given to applying for Certified Local Government status in order to further
historic preservation efforts in Summit. The State’s Certified Local Government Program is intended
to promote historic preservation on the municipal level with an emphasis on local control and
oversight. In order to achieve this, the Program provides qualified municipalities with financial
and technical assistance for historic preservation efforts. Municipalities that have been designated
a Certified Local Government are eligible to apply for 60/40 matching grants for a broad range
of historic preservation initiatives.
59
November 2006
IX. REEXAMINATION OF RECYCLING PLAN ELEMENT
A. THE MAJOR PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES RELATED TO RECYCLING IN SUMMIT AT THE TIME
OF THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003 REEXAMINATION REPORT.
Recycling Objective:
•
The continuation of the City’s recycling program in view of the environmental and land use
benefits as well as the cost savings it offered at all levels of government.
Recycling Recommendations:
•
The City should continue to promote the local and statewide benefits of recycling and continue to
expand and enhance its programs.
•
The Zoning Ordinance should be amended to establish and implement standards for the location,
design and maintenance of on-site trash/recyclable enclosures. The purpose should be to ensure
that adequate and safely designed and located space is incorporated into any site plan
application.
•
The City should continue to pursue the State of New Jersey to re-institute the tonnage grant
reimbursement program in order to offset local costs in implementing this State-mandated program.
•
The site plan and subdivision review checklists contained in the City’s Development Regulations
Ordinance should be amended to require that plan submittals include provisions for recyclable
storage facilities.
•
The Development Regulations Ordinance should be further amended to specify that all site plan
and subdivision applications be reviewed by the City’s recycling coordinator to ensure that
adequate and safe facilities have been provided.
60
November 2006
B.
THE EXTENT TO WHICH SUCH PROBLEMS AND OBJECTIVES HAVE BEEN REDUCED OR
HAVE INCREASED SINCE THE ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN 2000 AND THE 2003
REEXAMINATION REPORT
•
The City continues to promote the local and statewide benefits of recycling and to expand
and enhance its programs.
•
The Zoning Ordinance has been amended to include standards for the location, design and
maintenance of recycling facilities.
•
The City has pursued reinstitution of the State’s tonnage grant reimbursement program in order
to offset local costs in implementing this State-mandated program. The grant reimbursement
program was reinstituted for 2006 and is expected to be reinstituted for 2007.
•
The revision of site plan and subdivision review checklists to require that plan submittals
include provisions for recyclable storage facilities remains a valid recommendation.
•
Revision of the Development Regulations Ordinance to specify that all site plan and
subdivision applications be reviewed by the City’s recycling coordinator to ensure that
adequate and safe facilities have been provided remains a valid recommendation.
•
The City now has a recycling program for household electronics at the Transfer Station site.
•
Summit residents have the opportunity to participate in Union County’s hazardous waste
disposal program.
•
The City is starting a recycling task force to improve recycling compliance.
61
November 2006
C. THE EXTENT TO WHICH THERE HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN ASSUMPTIONS,
POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES FORMING THE BASIS FOR THE MASTER PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS AS LAST REVISED, WITH PARTICULAR REGARD TO THE DENSITY AND
DISTRIBUTION OF POPULATION AND LAND USES, HOUSING CONDITIONS, CIRCULATION,
CONSERVATION
OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES,
ENERGY
CONSERVATION,
COLLECTION,
DISPOSITION AND RECYCLING OF DESIGNATED RECYCLABLE MATERIALS, AND CHANGES IN
STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL POLICIES AND OBJECTIVES.
The City of Summit had a recycling program in place when the 2000 Master Plan was adopted. The City
was committed to the continuation of this program in view of the environmental and land use benefits as
well as the cost savings it offers at all levels of government. The City continues to be committed to its
recycling program. The zoning ordinance was amended to include standards for the location, design and
maintenance of recycling facilities. In addition, Summit’s recycling flyer is posted on the City’s website.
The Transfer Station Redevelopment Task Force is considering the possibility of relocating the City’s
recycling and composting operations in order to maximize the space available for future active and
passive recreation use at this site.
The table below summarizes the City’s residential recycling tonnage from 2001-2005. The table indicates
that the City’s residential recycling tonnage has been relatively steady over the past several years.
Co-mingle
Corrugated cardboard
Mixed paper
Newspaper
Batteries – lead
Batteries – household
Wood scraps
Motor oil
Fluorescent tubes
Electronics
Brush & stumps
Concrete & asphalt
Street sweepings
Leaves
Total recycle
Garbage total
Total
City of Summit Residential Recycling Tonnage
2001
2002
2003
930
954
887
1281
1233
1244
662
766
757
958
1281
717
6
5
4
1
2
1
95
92
80
2
11
8
4
5
4
55
80
80
1534
1542
1626
1660
452
802
889
743
949
796
743
743
8873
7909
7902
10920
10880
11350
19793
18789
19252
45%
42%
41%
62
– 2001-2005
2004
928
656
1038
1084
3
2
79
11
2
90
1497
597
560
675
7221
12066
19287
37%
2005
990
749
1805
786
6
2
75
5
1
116
1663
609
517
603
7927
11796
19723
40%
Total
4689
5163
5028
4826
24
7
421
37
16
420
7863
4120
3657
3560
39833
57012
96844
41%
November 2006
D.
THE SPECIFIC CHANGES RECOMMENDED FOR THE MASTER PLAN OR DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS, IF ANY, INCLUDING UNDERLYING OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND STANDARDS,
OR WHETHER A NEW PLAN OR REGULATIONS SHOULD BE PREPARED.
•
Two recommendations from Master Plan 2000 remain valid – to amend the City Development
Regulations Ordinance to update the site plan and subdivision review checklists to require that
plan submittals include provisions for recyclable storage facilities and to specify that all site plan
and subdivision applications be reviewed by the City’s recycling coordinator to ensure that
adequate and safe facilities have been provided.
•
Recycling efforts should be expanded in City buildings and public schools
63
November 2006
X. COMPATIBILITY WITH OTHER PLANNING EFFORTS SINCE MASTER PLAN 2000 AND
THE 2003 REEXAMINATION REPORT
State Planning
Cross Acceptance. On April 28, 2004, the New Jersey State Planning Commission approved the
release of the Preliminary State Development and Redevelopment Plan (State Plan) and the Preliminary
State Plan Policy Map. This action launched the third round of Cross-acceptance. Cross-acceptance is
designed to encourage consistency between municipal, county, regional, and state plans to create a
meaningful, up-to-date and viable State Plan. Through Cross-acceptance, negotiating entities work with
local governments and residents to compare their local master plans with the State Plan and to identify
potential changes that could be made to achieve a greater level of consistency with statewide planning
policy.
Union County serves as the negotiating entity in the Cross-acceptance process for municipalities in the
County.
The City participated in the Cross-acceptance process by which the City's information was
included in the County’s Cross-acceptance Report and will be used to help formulate the Crossacceptance Negotiation Agenda for Union County.
The City provided a detailed cross acceptance report to the County in early 2005. The City provided
specific recommendations regarding more spatially accurate mapping, specifically Critical Environmental
Sites (CES’s). The report stated that specific attention be given to public open space areas along the
Passaic River and the Watchung Preserve. The report recommended that all publicly owned land along
the Passaic River and Watchung Preserve be designated PA6, PA7, or PA8, and that privately owned
land along the Passaic River and Watchung Preserve have a CES designation placed on it.
Plan Endorsement.
Plan Endorsement is the process undertaken by regional agencies, counties, and
municipalities to have Master Plans, Municipal Strategic Revitalization Plans, Urban Complex Strategic
Revitalization Plans and Regional Plans endorsed by the State Planning Commission.
The Plan
Endorsement process involves a review of the petitioner's planning documents for consistency with the
goals, policies and strategies of the State Development and Redevelopment Plan, the State Plan Policy
Map, and with applicable State statutes and regulations. If the goals are consistent, the municipal plan is
considered endorsed.
64
November 2006
Once the State Planning Commission has endorsed a petitioner's plan as consistent with the State Plan,
state agencies will be providing benefits to the municipality that will assist in implementing the endorsed
plan. This assistance will include providing technical assistance, direct state capital investment, priority for
state grants and loans, and substantive and procedural (permit streamlining) regulatory changes.
If the City sets and achieves a goal of plan endorsement, it will be eligible for funding programs that may
only be available to municipalities with endorsed plans and/or it will receive additional "points" when
applying for State grants.
It is recommended that the City continue to participate in the Cross Acceptance process and go through
the Plan Endorsement process.
65
November 2006
E.
THE
RECOMMENDATIONS
INCORPORATION
OF
OF
REDEVELOPMENT
THE
PLANNING
PLANS
ADOPTED
BOARD
CONCERNING
PURSUANT
TO
THE
THE
"LOCAL
REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING LAW," P.L.1992, C. 79 (C.40A:12A-1 ET AL.) INTO THE
LAND USE PLAN ELEMENT OF THE MUNICIPAL MASTER PLAN, AND RECOMMENDED
CHANGES, IF ANY, IN THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE
THE REDEVELOPMENT PLANS OF THE MUNICIPALITY."
The City does not anticipate the use of the formal redevelopment process at this point in time.
66
November 2006